A new study co-authored by UC Berkeley professor Michael Manga confirms that earthquakes in America’s oil country — including a 4.8 magnitude quake that rocked Texas in 2012 — are being triggered by significant injections of wastewater below the surface of the Earth.

While there has been plenty of speculation that the alarming increase in seismic activity in states like Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas were a result of human activity, the study — which appears in the journal Science — fingers deep wastewater injections as the culprit.

“The proximity of the earthquake clusters to the injection wells suggests a link between them,” researchers explain in the report. “As wastewater is injected into the disposal formation, it increases pore pressure within the system… The increase in pore pressure caused by the injection of fluids decreases the effective normal stress on faults, bringing them closer to failure.”

The study details how Manga and his colleagues used interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) and GPS to detect small — no more than a few millimeters — but significant increases in surface elevation near four wells in East Texas. The surface uplift is likely the product of an increase in pore pressure — the pressure of fluids in the soil or rock below ground — caused by wastewater injections.

Wastewater injection wells exist because processes of extracting oil and natural gas from the Earth also yields a tremendous amount of water as well, sometimes exceeding 10 times more water than oil. The water that is extracted is saline and contaminated, and safe disposal of it is somewhat challenging. The water is too toxic to be introduced back into the water table, so the current disposal solution is re-injecting it back underground through these disposal wells. The four wells observed in this study became functional between 2005 and 2007 and have injected roughly 1 billion gallons of water back below ground.

“One way to think of it is like having a balloon underground,” said Manga. “As water is injected below the surface, the balloon expands, which increases the pressure that plays a role in triggering earthquakes.”

The study examined two wells that injected water a little more than a mile below ground, and two that injected water at about half that depth. The depth that the wastewater is disposed of, or the placement of the pressure balloon, plays a significant role in seismic activity.

Researchers found that there was detectable ground uplift in the area surrounding the two shallower wells where the water was being injected above a large, impermeable layer of rock. The increase in pressure was enough to distort surface elevations, but did not clearly factor in triggering earthquakes.

The two deeper wells injected water below this layer. Hundreds of millions of gallons of water were injected below this layer band of impermeable rock, ultimately having an impact on the pressure of “basement rock,” an area more than a mile below the surface where earthquakes form. As pore pressure rose, it sparked activity on an old fault in 2012. Tremors subsided by the end of 2013, when wastewater injections were reduced significantly.

“The findings are significant because they help us understand where earthquakes will happen, why they happen in some places and not others, and when they’ll happen again in the future,” said Manga.

Annual reports analyzing the wind energy industry released today by the Energy Department show continued rapid growth in wind power installations in 2015, demonstrating market resilience and underscoring the vitality of the U.S. wind energy market on a global scale. Wind power provides clean energy to homes and businesses, reduces climate-changing carbon pollution, and boosts America’s economic competitiveness. The U.S. wind power market remained strong in 2015 thanks to continued low prices, more-efficient wind turbines, and fast-growing demand nationwide.

“Sustained low wind energy prices and solid growth in installations helped make 2015 one of the best years for our nation’s renewable energy market,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Friedman. “These reports show that with more American homes and businesses powered by wind energy than ever before, our nation’s clean energy future is bright.”

Wind Technologies Market Report

According to the 2015 Wind Technologies Market Report released today by the Energy Department and its Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the United States ranks second in the world for wind power capacity and remains first in the world for electricity generated from wind power. Total installed wind power capacity from turbines rated at more than 100 kilowatts in the United States grew at an impressive rate of 12% in 2015 and stands at nearly 74 gigawatts, meeting an estimated 5.6% of U.S. end-use electricity demand in an average year. The nearly 8.6 gigawatts of capacity installed during 2015—representing more new deployment than any other electricity source—is a 77% increase over total installations in 2014. More than 4,300 utility-scale wind turbines were installed across 64 projects in 20 states in 2015, bringing the total fleet to more than 48,500 operating utility-scale wind turbines in 40 states and Puerto Rico.

The report also finds that wind energy continues to be sold at attractive prices through power purchase agreements, making this renewable energy source fully cost-competitive with traditional power sources in many parts of the United States. In fact, wind generated a total of more than 190 million megawatt hours of electricity in 2015—enough to power over 19 million average U.S. homes and saving the equivalent of more than 130 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2015.

Newer, larger, and more robust wind turbines are enabling significantly greater wind project productivity among new wind projects across the country. The report also illustrates how the U.S. wind industry has positively impacted the American workforce by currently supporting 88,000 jobs related to development, siting, manufacturing, transportation, and other industries—an increase of 15,000 jobs in 2015.

Distributed Wind Market Report

Compared with traditional, centralized power plants, distributed wind energy installations supply power directly to homes, farms, businesses, and communities. In total, U.S. wind turbines in distributed applications reached a cumulative installed capacity of more than 934 megawatts—enough to power more than 142,000 average American homes—according to the 2015 Distributed Wind Market Report, also released today by the Energy Department and its Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. This capacity comes from roughly 75,000 turbines installed across all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Turbines used in these applications can range in size from a few hundred watts to several megawatts, and can help power remote, off-grid homes and farms, as well as local schools and manufacturing facilities.

In 2015, U.S. manufacturers dominated domestic sales of small wind turbines (up through 100 kilowatts) and doubled exports to 21.5 megawatts. Between 2012 and 2015, U.S.-based small wind turbine manufacturers accounted for more than $310 million in small wind turbine export sales.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, American wind energy more than doubled from about 95 million megawatt hours generated in 2010 to more than 190 million megawatt hours in 2015. Hydropower has historically been the largest renewable electricity source, but capacity in wind, solar, and other non-hydro renewable sources has grown so much in recent years that non-hydro renewable electricity generation exceeded hydropower generation for the second straight year in 2015. Lower-than-normal levels of rain and snow have also contributed to lower hydropower generation in recent years.

Within 25 years, the United States could produce enough biomass to support a bioeconomy, including renewable aquatic and terrestrial biomass resources that could be used for energy and to develop products for economic, environmental, social, and national security benefits.

The 2016 Billion-Ton Report, jointly released by the U.S. Department of Energy and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), concludes that the United States has the potential to sustainably produce at least 1 billion dry tons of nonfood biomass resources annually by 2040.

These renewable resources include agricultural, forestry, and algal biomass, as well as waste. They encompass the current and future potential of biomass, from currently available logging and crop residues to future available algae and dedicated energy crops—all useable for the production of biofuel, biopower, and bioproducts.

The report findings show that under a base-case scenario, the United States could increase its use of dry biomass resources from a current 400 million tons to 1.57 billion tons under a high-yield scenario.

Increasing production and use of biofuel, biopower, and bioproducts would substantially decrease greenhouse gas emissions in the utility and transportation sectors and reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil as the domestic bioeconomy grows.

The analysis was led by ORNL with contributions from 65 experts from federal agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Transportation, and Federal Aviation Administration, as well as national laboratories (including Idaho National Laboratory, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory), and universities (including the University of Tennessee, North Carolina State University, South Dakota State University, and Oregon State University), as well as private companies (including Energetics, Inc. and Allegheny Science and Technology).

New to the 2016 report is novel assessments of potential biomass supplies from algae, from new energy crops (miscanthus, energy cane, eucalyptus), and from municipal solid waste. For the first time, the report also considers how the cost of pre-processing and transporting biomass to the biorefinery may impact feedstock availability.

Interactive tools available through the Bioenergy Knowledge Discovery Framework allow users to visualize biomass availability scenarios and tailor the data by factors such as geographic area, biomass source and price. Researchers and decision-makers can use these features to better inform national bioenergy policies and research, development, and deployment strategies. Each diagram and map in the report is available in an interactive interface on the Bioenergy Knowledge Discovery Framework.

The 2016 Billion-Ton Report, volume 1, updates and expands upon analysis in the 2011 U.S. Billion-Ton Update, which was preceded by the 2005 U.S. Billion Ton Study. The report uses scientific modeling systems to project biomass resource availability under specified economic and sustainability constraints.

Volume 2 of the report is set for release later this year, and will consist of a collection of analyses on the potential environmental sustainability effects of a subset of agricultural and forestry biomass production scenarios presented in volume 1. Volume 2 will also discuss algae sustainability, land use and land management changes, and strategies to enhance environmental sustainability.

On July 21, the Bioenergy Technologies Office will be hosting a joint webinar with Oak Ridge National Laboratory staff to further discuss and answer questions regarding the 2016 Billion-Ton Report volume 1 results, scenarios, assumptions, and constraints. We will send details on the webinar via an e-blast and social media following Bioenergy 2016.

In landmark agreement, California’s last remaining nuclear plant will be replaced by greenhouse-gas-free energy sources

A plan to shutter the last remaining nuclear power plant in California and replace it with renewable energy is being heralded widely as “a clear blueprint for fighting climate change,” which environmentalists hope will serve as “a model” for the nation.

“The end of an atomic era,” is how the San Francisco Chronicledescribed the announcement, made Tuesday by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), which operates the aging Diablo Canyon power plant situated on California’s central coast.

The joint proposal (pdf), drafted by the utility company along with a number of labor and environmental groups, states: “PG&E in consultation with the Parties has concluded that the most effective and efficient path forward for achieving California’s SB350 policy goal for deep reductions of [greenhouse gas (GHG)] emissions is to retire Diablo Canyon at the close of its current operating license period and replace it with a portfolio of GHG free resources.”

The licenses are currently set to expire in 2024 and 2025 and under the deal the utility will replace that power source with renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy storage. The agreement also contains provisions to protect the plant’s workforce, as well as the economy of the local San Luis Obispo community. PG&E further commits to derive 55 percent of the electricity produced across its entire fleet from clean, renewable sources by 2031.

“This is an historic agreement,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, which helped draft the plan, along with Natural Resources Defense Council, Environment California, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, Coalition of California Utility Employees, and Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility.

Pica continues, “It sets a date for the certain end of nuclear power in California and assures replacement with clean, safe, cost-competitive, renewable energy, energy efficiency and energy storage. It lays out an effective roadmap for a nuclear phase-out in the world’s sixth largest economy, while assuring a green energy replacement plan to make California a global leader in fighting climate change.”

Rhea Suh, president of NRDC, said the joint agreement is “a tribute to what can be accomplished when we rally together around a common goal.”

“What’s more,” Suh added, “this plan is a model that can be replicated around the country, where nearly 100 nuclear reactors will retire in the coming decades, and around the world.”

“For years,” she continued, “some have claimed that we can’t fight climate change without nuclear power, because shutting down nuclear plants would mean burning more fossil fuels to generate replacement electricity. That’s wrong, of course, and now we have the proof.”

“Today’s agreement is a good example of how we can replace dirty energy with clean when we set our minds to it,” agreed Rob Sargent, Energy Program director at Environment America. “It’s this kind of commitment that will put us on a path to 100 percent renewable energy.”

Tuesday’s announcement follows years of public opposition to the plant, which sits in an earthquake red zone near four prominent fault lines—one of which runs just 2,000 feet from the two reactors. As anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman recently noted, “[m]ore protestors have been arrested at Diablo than any other American nuke.”

In addition to the risks posed by potential earthquake damage, Wasserman wrote, “Diablo dumps daily some 2.5 billion gallons of super-heated water into the ocean, killing vast quantities of marine life and worsening the global climate crisis. The project’s chemical runoff infamously killed millions of abalone years before it operated.”

The detailed phase out proposal will now go to the California Public Utility Commission and on to federal regulators for approval.

According to the Chronicle, the decommissioning process is estimated to cost $3.8 billion, $2.6 million of which PG&E has already collected in an earmarked fund. The utility is reportedly seeking to raise electricity rates by roughly 51 cents per month to make up the shortfall.

Voicing his support for the plan, California lieutenant governor Gavin Newsom, said: “The idea that the economics— from PG&E’s perspective—work for renewables is a pretty profound moment in energy policy. We’ve been asserting it for decades. And here you have a major utility acknowledging a low-carbon, green future.”

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

On the heels of clean fuel milestones in Germany and Portugal , a new report finds that the renewable energy industry employed over 8.1 million people worldwide in 2015.

According to the International Renewable Energy Agency’s (IRENA) annual review, that figure marks a 5% increase from the previous year. China led the pack, accounting for 3.5 million jobs. Brazil and U.S. ranked second and third, respectively, for the highest number of renewable energy jobs.

The solar photovoltaic (PV) sector shot up 11% and accounted for biggest number of jobs at 2.8 million globally.

In the U.S. alone, solar grew nearly 22%. That’s “12 times faster than job creation in the US economy­—surpassing jobs in oil and gas,” the report states. The other country seeing growth in solar was Japan, which notched a 28% increase in solar PV employment in 2014.

Wind saw “a record year” in employment, the report states. Wind energy employment in the U.S. grew 21%; worldwide it grew 5%. At the same time, oil and gas extraction jobs fell by 18 percent in the U.S.

“This increase is being driven by declining renewable energy technology costs and enabling policy frameworks,” stated IRENA Director-General Adnan Z. Amin. “We expect this trend to continue as the business case for renewables strengthens and as countries move to achieve their climate targets agreed in Paris,” he added, referring to the UN climate deal sealed at the end of 2015.

Mark Kenber, CEO of The Climate Group, an organization that advocates for reining in carbon emissions, added, “A clean revolution is key to growth, investment, jobs, health, security: there is no high-carbon prosperous future.”

The new review follows a separate brief released (pdf) by IRENA on “the true costs of of fossil fuels,” which found that doubling the global share of renewables by 2030 would save not only $4.2 trillion annually but also as many as 4 million lives.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

The first harvest of 34 acres of fast-growing shrub willow from a Penn State demonstration field this winter is a milestone in developing a sustainable biomass supply for renewable energy and bio-based economic development, according to researchers in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences.

The shrub willow stand at the Penn State Rockview site can continue producing biomass for more than 20 years. Photo: Penn State

The shrub willow plantation is part of a broader five-year program called NEWBio, which is aimed at investigating and promoting sustainable production of woody biomass and warmseason grasses for energy in the Northeast. Planted in 2012 on land formerly owned by the State Correctional Institution at Rockview, the biomass crop will regrow and will be harvested every three years from now on.

NEWBio, a regional consortium of institutions lead by Penn State and funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture, is one of seven regional projects across the United States. Other consortium partners are Cornell University, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, West Virginia University, Delaware State University, Ohio State University, Rutgers University, USDA’s Eastern Regional Research Center, and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Idaho National Laboratory.

“The shrub willow stand at Rockview can continue producing biomass for more than 20 years, and we hope to use it both as a source of renewable energy and as a platform for sustainability research,” said Armen Kemanian, associate professor of production systems and modeling in the Department of Plant Science, one of the lead researchers in the project.

“This is an excellent site to investigate impacts on soil and water quality, biodiversity, avoided carbon dioxide emissions, and the potential for growing a regional bio-based economy,” he said. “Students from our college visit the site and have a firsthand and close-up view of this new crop for the region.”

Why shrub willow? Because the woody perennial likes to be cut, explained Kemanian. He noted that visitors to Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming may remember the “willow flats,” grazed to a uniform height by moose and elk.

“At the Rockview site we don’t have moose, but we do take advantage of shrub willow’s vigorous regrowth to harvest for multiple cycles,” he said. “As perennial plants, they establish a root system that stabilizes the soil and stores substantial amounts of carbon that otherwise would be lost to the atmosphere.”

Perennial biomass crops shrub willow, switchgrass and miscanthus — all of which are being investigated at other experimental sites around the Northeast — also store and recycle nutrients, so they do not require much fertilizer and can improve water quality in streams, rivers and estuaries, such as the Chesapeake Bay. Increasing perennial vegetation is a critical component of Pennsylvania’s water quality strategy, and these biomass crops allow vulnerable parts of the landscape to remain economically productive while protecting water quality.

Shrub willow can produce the same amount of biomass as a corn crop with only a third of the nitrogen fertilizer, Kemanian pointed out. When the plants grow, they take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. After harvest, when the biomass is combusted either as wood chips or as a liquid biofuel, the carbon dioxide returns to the atmosphere to complete the cycle.

Felipe Montes, a research associate in the Department of Plant Science, established an array of sensors to measure carbon dioxide and water vapor fluxes, which are giving a vivid picture of the growth potential in the region. Shrub willow is one the first plants to leaf out in early spring and dies back late in the fall, and this long growing season makes it extremely efficient in converting sunlight and nutrients to a bioenergy feedstock.

“We estimate that we can harvest 20 to 30 units of energy per unit of fossil energy invested in producing the crop, leading to fuel with a very low carbon footprint,” Montes said. “The fact that this biomass can be converted to liquid fuel is one of the main advantages of shrub willow and other biomass crops. Low carbon liquid fuels are especially important for long distance transportation, shipping and aviation, where electric vehicles are not practical.”

Biomass energy could provide the social, economic and ecological drivers for a sustainable rural renaissance in the Northeast, according to NEWBio project leader Tom Richard, professor of agricultural and biological engineering and director of the Penn State Institutes of Energy and the Environment. He believes perennial energy crops are particularly well suited for the region, where forests and pasture long have dominated the landscape.

Rocky and sloped soils are more compatible with perennial crops, while perennial root systems better tolerate wet springs and occasional summer drought, Richard said. Northeast biomass production has high water-use efficiency (biomass produced per unit of water transpired by plants) owing to the region’s moderate temperatures and relatively high humidity. These perennial crops also increase organic matter in the soil, and coupled with efficient refining and manufacturing processes can produce carbon-negative energy and materials.

“Concerns about energy, environmental and human health, rural economic development, and the need to diversify agricultural products and markets have made the development of sustainably produced biomass feedstocks for biofuels, bioproducts and bioenergy a critical national priority,” said Richard.

“Perennial bioenergy systems, such as the shrub willow demonstrated at Penn State, appear to hold an important key to future economic development for our region. But to unlock that future, we need to learn how to economically handle the harvesting, transportation and storage of massive volumes, which constitutes 40 to 60 percent of the cost of biomass. This project is providing the knowledge and experience needed for a regional bioeconomy to achieve commercial success.”

Critics of biofuels like ethanol argue they are an unsustainable use of land. But with careful management, next-generation grass-based biofuels can net climate savings and improve their ecosystems.

Miscanthus and switchgrass, two perennial grasses that could be used for biofuels, grow in front of a corn crib. Photo: Evan DeLucia

As the world seeks strategies to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere, bioenergy is one promising substitute for fossil fuels [Somerville et al., 2010]. Currently, the United States uses the starch component from roughly 40% of its corn harvest to produce ethanol for the transportation sector (see the National Agricultural Statistics Service website).

Cornstarch production is technologically simple—a so-called first-generation bioenergy technology. However, growing corn requires a lot of fertilizer and field preparation that ultimately depend on fossil fuels, tempering the net carbon savings.

Because of this, researchers have focused on developing fuel production using more advanced methods and second-generation bioenergy crops. These methods make liquid fuel, primarily ethanol, from lignocellulose, which composes the structural elements of plants, leaves, stalks, and stems. Because many of these crops are perennials (they grow back year after year), they often require less fertilizer and tillage, avoiding many of the negatives associated with corn and other annual crops that need intensive management.

A challenge with second-generation energy crops, however, is that they yield much less energy—lignocellulose produces less than one third of the energy per unit mass compared to fossil fuels. Because of this low energy density, the United States would need to invest a considerable amount of land to meet a significant part of national demand, a land area almost the size of Wisconsin to meet the Renewable Fuel Standard mandate for 32 billion gallons of biofuel [Hudiburg et al., 2015].

The conversion of current land uses and management practices to the cultivation of bioenergy crops directly affects the climate system and is a fundamental process underlying the ecological sustainability of bioenergy production, as well as the ability of bioenergy crops to mitigate climate change. Where conversion of native prairie to corn negatively affects climate by releasing CO2 and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, planting second-generation grass-based biofuel crops on marginal or degraded land can reduce our carbon footprint and provide other beneficial ecosystem services.

Changing the Landscape Changes Our Climate

Public discussion of climate change often focuses on the atmosphere. As greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane accumulate in the atmosphere, they warm the planet by absorbing infrared radiation. But that’s not the whole picture: those greenhouse gases are also constantly cycling between the atmosphere and the land (Figure 1). Therefore, changes in land use, vegetation, and how we manage it affect climate by altering that exchange.

Fig. 1. Terrestrial ecosystems affect the climate system by influencing the exchange of greenhouse gases between the land surface and the atmosphere (biogeochemical regulation) and by influencing the exchange of energy (evapotranspiration and albedo) with the atmosphere (biophysical regulation). Biogeochemical processes affect the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, influencing global climate on decadal time scales or longer, whereas biophysical processes cause local cooling or warming over days and months. Credit: Evan DeLucia

The metabolisms of plants and soil microbes help to regulate the exchange of GHGs with the atmosphere, as these molecules or their precursors are stored in biomass and soil. Clearing a native forest, for example, releases large quantities of carbon stored in biomass and soil to the atmosphere (“storage”; Figure 2). Indeed, creating and managing farmland contribute more than 14% of the world’s GHG emissions (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, global greenhouse gas emissions data, 2015).

Fig. 2. (a) Biogeochemical climate services reflect the greenhouse gases that would be released from land clearing and the change in ongoing exchange with the atmosphere. (b) Similarly, land clearing affects biophysical climate services, albedo, related to net radiation (Rnet), and latent heat flux from evaporation (LE), related to changes in evapotranspiration. Positive values represent a net cooling effect on the atmosphere. (c) The sum of greenhouse gases and biophysical factors is the climate regulating value (CRV) of an ecosystem. Values are normalized to the warming potential of carbon dioxide (CO2) and are expressed relative to bare ground over a 50-year time frame. Replacing an ecosystem with a high CRV with that having a low value would have a net warming effect on the atmosphere and vice versa. Reproduced from Anderson-Teixiera et al. [2012].

Terrestrial ecosystems also affect climate on local scales by regulating the exchange of energy between the land and atmosphere (Figure 1) [Davin et al., 2014; Zhao and Jackson, 2014]. Land covered with vegetation generally absorbs more sunlight than bare soil, contributing to local warming. Working against this, when water evaporates and passes into the atmosphere from soil and vegetation (known collectively as evapotranspiration), it carries heat away from the land, causing local cooling. Thus, forest clearing would reduce the cooling effect of evapotranspiration but would increase the reflectivity of the surface (or its albedo), allowing it to reflect more radiation.

However, global effects are complicated because evapotranspiration means more moisture in the atmosphere, which can increase cloud cover, affecting the global radiation balance. Also, when the moisture condenses into clouds elsewhere, it releases its latent heat, which can cancel the local cooling effect [Pielke et al., 2002; Snyder et al., 2004]. Unlike GHGs that have a locally weak but globally strong effect on the atmosphere, albedo and evapotranspiration affect climate locally [Bright, 2015].

By normalizing the warming (or cooling) potential of nitrous oxide (N2O), methane, albedo, and evapotranspiration to the warming potential of CO2, the contribution of different ecosystems to climate regulation can be expressed as a single metric: the climate regulating value (CRV) [Anderson-Teixeira et al., 2012]; this value provides an integrated index of the direct effects of land clearing on the surface energy budget, where the greater the CRV is, the greater the cooling effect is (Figure 2).

Long-Term Strategic Planting

In native forests and other ecosystems with large carbon stocks, biogeochemical processes—those processes that store and exchange GHGs with the atmosphere—can play a larger role in regulating the climate than biophysical processes such as changes in evapotranspiration and albedo (Figure 2). The opposite can be true for perennial grasses that don’t store much biomass but have high evapotranspiration and albedo.

Therefore, displacing native forests, particularly tropical forests, with annual or perennial crops for energy production will, in most cases, have a net warming effect on the atmosphere, releasing large quantities of carbon stored in biomass and soil (Figure 2). But replacing annual crops or placing high-yield bioenergy crops on marginal land (that is, land that cannot produce high-value crops) has a very different effect.

Replacing annual crops with perennial grasses such as miscanthus and switchgrass would pull carbon out of the atmosphere and return it to the ground (Figure 2). These crops allocate a large fraction of their biomass below ground in their root systems, and they can rapidly build up carbon stores in soil, reversing losses associated with frequent tillage, particularly on degraded or heavily tilled soils [Anderson-Teixeira et al., 2009, 2013; Powlson et al., 2011].

In terms of climate effects, this is doubly helpful. In addition to displacing fossil fuels by providing a renewable biofuel, replacing low-CRV annual crops with high-CRV perennial grasses would have a net cooling effect on the atmosphere because of the changes in biogeochemical and biophysical properties. In particular, the increased albedo from perennial grass and the heat carried away by evapotranspiration can amount to a considerable cooling effect compared to annual row crops [Georgescu et al., 2011].

The U.S. Midwest: From Carbon Source to Sink

Of the approximately 40 million hectares in the United States that are planted with corn, mostly in the Midwest, only 8% of them directly feeds humans; most of the rest (73%) is for feeding livestock and producing ethanol (National Agricultural Statistics Service website, 2015). Displacing corn currently grown for ethanol with high-yielding perennial grasses would have enormous environmental benefits, without displacing land used for food production. Davis et al. [2012] predict that replacing ethanol-bound corn with perennial grasses would reduce emissions of GHGs to the atmosphere while increasing soil carbon. The emissions of N2O in particular would be reduced because perennial grasses require so much less nitrogen than corn [Smith et al., 2013]. Over the entire region, this transition would convert soils in the Midwest from a net source to a net sink for GHGs while simultaneously increasing fuel production and reducing the contamination of groundwater by fertilizer-derived nitrate.

Prime corn land is expensive. Restricting most bioenergy grasses to more affordable marginal land would also drive a reduction in U.S. GHG emissions, albeit a smaller one than replacing corn ethanol, and would still meet the Renewal Fuel Standard’s mandate for 32 billion gallons of renewable biofuel, with negligible effects on food crop production [Hudiburg et al., 2015].

The biophysical processes will also help to regulate climate. Evapotranspiration would increase slightly—less than 10% [VanLoocke et al., 2010]—but combined with an increased albedo, that’s enough to provide an additional local cooling effect.

The Promise and Challenges of a Bioenergy Landscape

In addition to displacing CO2 emitted from fossil fuels, the expansion of perennial bioenergy crops in the U.S. Midwest will likely have positive effects on the climate system. This, however, is not necessarily the case elsewhere. In much of the United States west of the 100th meridian (a line that roughly bisects the Dakotas and Texas), the ability of the atmosphere to remove water (potential evapotranspiration) exceeds precipitation. There, the irrigation necessary for energy crops would pose severe environmental challenges.

We must take care to avoid these unintended negative consequences of expanding lignocellulosic bioenergy production. But with appropriate financial incentives [Dwivedi et al., 2015], there are many strategies to use land sustainably to contribute to the U.S. demand for transportation fuel: the use of marginal or underproductive lands [Gelfand et al., 2013] or replacing intensively managed corn for ethanol with high-yielding, low-input perennials. When annual crops that require intensive management are replaced with high-yielding perennial plants, bioenergy crops can simultaneously reduce the emission of GHGs to the atmosphere and improve the health of agricultural landscapes [Werling et al., 2014].

Bright, R. M. (2015), Metrics for biogeophysical climate forcings from land use and land cover changes and their inclusion in life cycle assessment: A critical review, Environ. Sci. Technol., 49, 3291–3303.

Greenpeace says world leaders must not let the fossil fuel industry stand in the way of the necessary—and attainable—transition to a clean and safe energy future

With scientists and experts from around the world telling world leaders with increasing urgency ahead of upcoming climate talks in Paris that “It must be done,” a new report says “It can be done.”

As the planetary impacts of global warming become more apparent with every passing day, the goal of building and maintaining an energy system run on 100 % renewable power has become one of the driving demands of the world’s environmental and climate justice movements, new research presented by Greenpeace on Monday shows that if the political will can be mustered, there are neither technological nor economic barriers preventing humanity from building a fossil fuel- and nuclear-free world by 2050.

“I urge all those who say ‘it can’t be done’ to read this report and recognize that it can be done and must be done for the benefit of people around the world.”

~Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace

“The phase out of fossil fuels and transition to renewable energy is not only needed, but can be achieved globally by mid-century,” said Kelly Mitchell, the climate and energy campaign director for Greenpeace USA. “In the US, we must prioritize keeping coal, oil and gas in the ground while accelerating the transition to clean energy like wind and solar. Doing so would both create new jobs and ensure a healthier planet for future generations.”

According to the report:

100% renewable energy for all is achievable by 2050, and is the only way to ensure the world does not descend into catastrophic climate change. Dynamic change is taking place in the energy sector. Renewable energies have become mainstream in most countries, and prices have fallen dramatically. The report shows we could transform our energy supply, switching to renewables, which would mean a stabilization of global CO2 emissions by 2020, and bringing down emissions towards near zero emissions in 2050.

Produced in collaboration with researchers at the German Aerospace Centre (DLR), the new Greenpeace report—titled World Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable World Energy Outlook 2015—is the latest global energy analysis which shows that not only is the transition to cleaner energy sources possibly in the coming decades, the actual financial costs of taking on a such a massive transition would actually be cheaper over the coming decades than retaining the “dirty energy” status quo in the face of climate change.

Greenpeace admits the cost of its plan is “huge” but that “the savings are even bigger.” According to their estimates, the global average of additional investment needed in renewables is roughly $1 trillion a year until 2050. However, because renewables don’t require continuous fuel inputs, the savings over the same period would be $1.07 trillion a year, more than covering the costs of the required up-front investment.

Calling for a strategic phase-out of both fossil fuel and nuclear energy by mid-century, the Greenpeace plan targets the most carbon-intensive fossil fuels first—including lignite and coal—before moving on to less-polluting sources like oil and gas.

“We must not let the fossil fuel industry’s lobbying stand in the way of a switch to renewable energy, the most effective and fairest way to deliver a clean and safe energy future,” said Greenpeace International Executive Director Kumi Naidoo. “I urge all those who say ‘it can’t be done’ to read this report and recognize that it can be done and must be done for the benefit of people around the world.”

What’s more, the group says, this energy transformation would be a source of millions upon millions of jobs, more than enough to replace those lost by the shuttering of the coal, oil, and gas industries.

The report says that nearly 20 million jobs in the renewable energy sector could be created between now and 2030, because of strong growth and investment in renewables. The solar photovoltaic (PV) industry alone, the research estimates, will provide 9.7 million jobs, equal to the number of people now working in the coal industry today. In the wind sector—which has shown unprecedented growth in recent years–job growth will continue grow to over 7.8 million jobs, twice as many as are employed in oil and gas today.

“The solar and wind industries have come of age, and are now cost competitive with coal,” said Greenpeace’s Sven Teske, the lead author of the report. “It is very likely they will overtake the coal industry in terms of jobs and energy supplied within the next decade. It’s the responsibility of the fossil fuel industry to prepare for these changes in the labor market and make provisions. Every dollar invested in new fossil fuel projects is high risk capital which could end up as stranded investment.”

With the UN climate talks in Paris fast-approaching, Greenpeace says the urgency of the crisis must compel political leaders to finally act—and act boldly—on the message that the scientific community and civil society leaders have been issuing with growing levels of intensity in recent years.

With their new report as a blueprint for what’s possible, said Naidoo, “the Paris climate agreement must deliver a long term vision for phasing out coal, oil, gas and nuclear energy by mid-century, reaching the goal of 100% renewables with energy access for all.”

A Colorado community is developing a community-based clean energy economy.

Citizens of Boulder, Colorado, in collaboration with city government, have been engaged in local climate action activities for more than a decade, and in 2014 adopted a Climate Commitment to achieve an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Boulder, Colorado, sits at the foot of the Rocky Mountains a half-hour drive northwest of Denver. It is a city, but still small enough to be a coherent community. It is the home of a major university and many government and entrepreneurial scientific, academic, and technical enterprises. The residents share an appreciation for the natural beauty of the mountains and plains environment, and many settled here for that reason.

Today, Boulder’s city government is in a major legal struggle to municipalize its electricity grid. To accomplish that, it must wrest control from the incumbent monopoly investor-owned utility, Xcel Energy of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which acquired Public Service Company of Colorado 20 years ago.

The motivation for this struggle is not reliability or the quality or cost of service, but rather decarbonization—cleaner, local energy and global climate change mitigation. Xcel runs mostly on coal and has long-term commitments to fossil fuels. The Boulder community, in collaboration with its city government, has been engaged in significant local climate action activities for more than a decade, and last year adopted a Climate Commitment to achieve an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Boulder is inventing a new model for a “utility of the future.” Although a few other small cities such as Gainesville and Winter Park, Florida, and others have formed municipal utilities in recent years, they did so for financial, service-related, or other reasons. Boulder, on the other hand, is motivated by the desire for clean energy.

The city’s timing is excellent. The rapidly advancing technological revolution in electricity makes it more likely it will achieve its goals. Boulder’s municipal utility will take advantage of this revolution, making it fundamentally different from conventional munis.

Nearly 30 munis already exist in Colorado, including the neighboring cities of Fort Collins, Longmont, Colorado Springs, and others. However, these have been in existence for many decades and their structure, infrastructure, and business models are similar to conventional utilities. Some, like Fort Collins, are working to bring in more renewable energy, but this is a formidable challenge given its long legacy, infrastructure, and obligations around conventional generation. Other innovative established munis face a similar challenge, notably Austin Energy and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD).

The Existing Paradigm

About 60% of the electricity in the United States is provided by investor-owned utilities. They operate on a century-old regulated monopoly business model based on cost recovery and return on capital assets. State regulators guarantee them a profit on the commodity sale of kilowatt-hours of electricity and a 10% to 12% return on capital assets. As a result, their profits depend on building and maintaining centralized generation and transmission infrastructure.

Renewables—particularly solar photovoltaics—are inherently distributed resources. There is essentially no economy of scale in building large generation and transmission infrastructure because it cannot compete long term with rooftop solar-plus-storage and other small-scale distributed renewable sources. As distributed renewables, especially when paired with energy storage, become more widespread, utilities, even traditional municipals and co-ops, will be left with large investments and/or long-term commitments in the centralized big grid paradigm. The conventional centralized utility infrastructure will become increasingly expensive and eventually obsolete. (See the March/April 2015 issue of SOLAR TODAY at bit.ly/1dgJaby for current examples of cost-effective distributed solar and storage.)

Buying the Wires and Poles

Although it must start by buying the existing wires and poles, the concept behind the Boulder muni is not to run a conventional electric utility that generates or purchases electricity. Rather, the idea is to provide energy services—health, comfort, safety, and economic vitality—to its customers, at the best price and with the least environmental impact.

Distributed energy resources like these photovoltaic (PV) systems in a Boulder neighborhood—especially when they are paired with on-site storage—may eventually make large centralized power plants obsolete. Photo: Dennis Schroeder NREL PIX 29600

In a sense, however, Boulder first must pay the “ransom” to get out from under what many perceive as a dysfunctional and inaccessible Public Utilities Commission-based regulatory regime. That is, the city must buy the right to govern its own local electricity grid.

Once this is achieved, an entirely new electricity paradigm can be implemented—one that is based on distributed renewable energy and in which the users generate most of the power. This will likely take the form of community solar microgrids based on solar-plus-storage at scales ranging from single homes to community solar gardens to commercial and industrial buildings. It will also likely include more small-scale hydro, because Boulder already generates a significant amount of local hydro-electric power.

Buying the “old wires and poles” is not an alternative to innovation but rather it is the price of the right to innovate. Also, the wires and poles will be needed to operate the local distribution grid as a service to the community.

Boulder’s new utility will likely include a number of community solar microgrids at scales ranging from single homes to larger PV installations. These arrays are part of an effort to achieve net zero energy at Fort Hunter Liggett in California. They provide shade for vehicles as well as produce electricity, and—when completed—this solar microgrid project will comprise 5 megawatts of PV generation and a 3-megawatt-hour battery energy storage system. Photo: U.S. Army, John Prettyman, CC

Although the voter-approved maximum authorized acquisition figure was $214 million, it is important to remember that whether the price is “expensive” or not is a calculation based on what Boulder would be paying out to a monopoly grid operator over time. In fact, it may turn out to be a bargain in the long run, especially if the city can achieve its clean energy goals.

Citizen-Driven Collaboration

Why not launch a statewide policy overhaul rather than a muni? The short answer is because local action is what works.

It’s increasingly true in the United States that effective action is only possible on the local community level. State and federal institutions have become so politicized, captured, and co-opted by corporate power and money that they are less and less accessible to citizens. The fracking confrontation and state preemption of local regulation is one example.

In Boulder, the muni project did not originate with the city government. The city only embraced the idea after years of committed grassroots efforts by many local citizens in passionate pursuit of cleaner energy. These Boulder residents talked through the issues among themselves, attended end- less meetings and hearings, and did the legwork it took to inform the City Council and then bring the city management and staff around. In fact, previous city officials—including a mayor, a city attorney, and a city manager—were opposed or uninterested.

A consensus began to coalesce in the 2007 timeframe with spontaneous gatherings in homes and cafes of citizens concerned about “de-carbonization.” Boulder citizens had passed a carbon tax in 2006 to fund local energy efficiency programs. Between 2008 and 2010, members of the City Council, frustrated by years of intractable and fruitless franchise renewal negotiations with Xcel and by the embarrassing $30 million debacle of Xcel’s “SmartGridCity” project, began to reconsider and look for alternatives.

Residents of Boulder, Colorado share an appreciation for the natural beauty of their local environment. Photo: City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks

City staff supported the decarbonization effort by hosting community meetings and working groups. Volunteer working groups and paid consultants completed studies and models. Mobilized by major successful battles around ballot measures during two subsequent elections (2011 and 2013), the growing community support matured and the city added more staff support. During 2013 and 2014, additional volunteer working groups were formed to study grid modeling, natural gas, solar, utility governance, collaboration with Xcel, and other technical and regulatory aspects of energy and electricity.

Boulder hired a muni director, Heather Bailey from Austin, Texas, with the title “executive director of energy strategy and electric utility development.” She is an experienced regulator, utility executive, and consultant with 30 years in the utility industry. She and her Energy Future staff are currently pursuing the legal and regulatory action required to take over the local grid.

The City Council, city staff, muni director, and Energy Future staff all understand that the success of the municipalization effort depends on civic engagement and the community’s base of active volunteers. This is why the 2011 and 2013 muni ballot measures prevailed against heavily (10:1) financed opposition.

In parallel with the condemnation and acquisition effort by city staff, several new volunteer working groups meet on a regular basis, research various problems, develop reports, and recommend policies. These groups focus on issues including resource acquisition, rates, and energy services.

Independent of city government efforts, some volunteer civic, business, and professional groups in town sponsor periodic events that feature guest speakers, seminars, fundraisers, or social gatherings to foster community understanding and encourage dialogue related to energy and environmental issues. Many of these events engage citizens with elected officials or city staff working on different aspects of municipalization and other clean energy activities.

Next Steps

City staff will move the muni forward by condemning and purchasing the local grid infrastructure during what will likely be a multi-year legal and regulatory battle. Another critical initiative will be developing ways to facilitate the financial investment needed to convert the local grid to solar and other renewables. For example, the city might establish a municipal bond or secure investment bank financing to establish a city loan or grant fund for helping residents, government facilities, and businesses install solar and other renewable energy equipment. This could take the form of solar gardens, community microgrids, rooftop solar, distributed grid storage batteries, small-scale hydro, wind, LED lighting, and energy efficiency programs.

Planning is also in process to organize and manage the eventual transition from the present electricity system to the new system. This involves arranging to purchase electricity for a period of time while the muni starts up and developing demonstration projects to verify the viability of the technical solutions under consideration (rooftop solar plus batteries, electric vehicle charging stations, etc.). Boulder will also have to organize a “service utility” to maintain and operate the local grid by hiring the necessary professionals and identifying the existing inventory, new equipment, and other resources required to operate its own utility.

Power to (and From) the People

As Boulder shapes its energy future, it has adopted an “energy localization framework.” This framework seeks to democratize energy decision making so customers have more direct control over and involvement in energy decisions. This includes opportunities to invest in their long-term energy needs and to have a say in energy investments made on their behalf.

Schools provide excellent venues for solar installations, both because the electricity can reduce their utility costs and because the systems offer educational opportunities for students. Photo: Dennis Schroeder, NREL

Under the framework, energy would be generated locally or regionally whenever feasible, reducing reliance on external fuel sources. Customers would manage and reduce their energy use directly and effectively and energy service companies would compete and innovate within a diverse and robust local energy economy.

Renewable and clean fuel sources would be used whenever possible and would be brought into the energy mix as quickly as possible. This will have the effect of decarbonizing the energy supply and minimizing both short- and long-term environmental impacts. It will also promote energy independence.

As Boulder works through the process of establishing its municipal utility, it’s hard to know precisely what the final outcome will be. The lessons learned may go far beyond providing electricity and energy services to local homes and businesses, however. This collaboration of citizens, elected officials, and city staff may prove to be an example of the purest kind of democracy in action.

To build a new, clean energy future, communities and citizens need to take back their power. In Boulder, at least, it appears that power really will come from the people.

Timothy Schoechle, Ph.D., (timothy@schoechle.org) is a senior research fellow at the National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy (NISLAPP). He lives in Boulder, volunteers on municipalization working groups, and does electronic engineering for solar homes and buildings.

This article originally appeared in the May/June issue of SOLAR TODAY magazine, published by the American Solar Energy Society. solartoday.org

Advances in printed solar cell technology promise clean renewable energy, opening possibilities for 1.3 billion people still without electric power in developing countries.

The technology, which only requires the use of existing industrial-size printers, can produce solar cells that are flexible and inexpensive to transport, says Scott Watkins, director of the overseas business unit of Korean firm Kyung-In Synthetic.

Scott Watkins with a roll of thin film solar cells: the active layer is 200 times thinner than a human hair. Credit: Tracey Nicholls/scienceimage

The malleable nature of the paper-thin solar cells makes it ideal for rural communities in remote locations, adds Watkins who spoke at the Smart Villages session of the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul, South Korea on June 8th, 2015.

Existing solar energy technology consists of silicon-based panels which are produced in wafers and require a large amount of sunlight to be efficient. Printed solar cells employ a more organic approach that uses perovskites, a mineral made out of a precise mixture of lead, iodine and a simple organic component.

Interest and research funding in printed solar cell technology has taken off in recent years, resulting to a jump in energy efficiency to 20 per cent from just 3 per cent a few years ago.

However, printed solar cells have been shown to be vulnerable to moisture and may cause lead contamination should the cell break.

Watkins says that his organisation is looking into different types of coaters such as dual-feed spray coaters that allow for more customisable solar prints.

“Printed solar cells have worked very well with Smart Village programmes. I’ve witnessed first-hand how the technology has enabled urban poor communities in India to access off-grid electricity,” says Watkins.

“Its success is due to its cost effectiveness and simplicity. A 10×10 cm solar cell film is enough to generate as much as 10-50 watts per square metre,” he adds.

But some challenges hinder large-scale production and distribution of the technology.

Bernie Jones, project co-leader of the Smart Villages Initiative, notes that although they have almost perfected the method of producing solar film strips at a low cost, replicating the production process requires a large amount of capital.

Other problems involve setting up a distribution network, which can be challenging for communities situated in remote areas. Some villages such as the Bario community in Sarawak are only accessible by river, which also opens issues regarding payment and monetary collection, Jones says.

Jones suggests establishing a cooperative system, citing the case of farmers’ cooperatives in Rwanda. He says this may alleviate the issue of distribution while solving the initial problem of securing capital.